[OpenID] OpenID IPR Policy Draft

[Gabe Wachob]

The reason is easy - each of these organizations has a different process and
the IPR is intimately tied to process (for example, when certain disclosure
and licensing agreements come into force). 

 

In addition, some bodies offer a broader spectrum of levels of IPR
encumberance for the specs produced in each body. 

 

They actually don't differ much beyond this, however, and the spirit of the
respective IPR policies are converging.

 

            -Gabe

 

  _____  

From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip [mailto:pbaker at verisign.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 10:20 AM
To: Gabe Wachob; Brett McDowell; Recordon, David
Cc: specs at openid.net; general at openid.net
Subject: RE: OpenID IPR Policy Draft

 

Why not just take the W3C IPR policy verbatim and change the organization
name?

 

The W3C patent policy is I believe released under creative commons for
precisely this reason if not this can easily happen. The agreement was
subscribed to by all the major vendors and the major open source groups.

 

Unless someone wants to incorporate proprietary technology that they are not
willing to release the rights to as required by the W3C terms this is a
debate we don't need to have.

 

 

Ideally the Apache, Mozilla, OASIS, W3C and IETF IPR WGs would get together
and devise an industry standard acceptable to both Open Source and
proprietary vendors. The introduction of suspense licenses means that it is
not unthinkable that they would reach a common set of terms.


 


  _____  


From: specs-bounces at openid.net [mailto:specs-bounces at openid.net] On Behalf
Of Gabe Wachob
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 1:01 PM
To: 'Brett McDowell'; Recordon, David
Cc: specs at openid.net; general at openid.net
Subject: RE: OpenID IPR Policy Draft

Brett-

            We need to get consensus on what the community wants before we
take this to an attorney.. However, I've done these sorts of IPR policies
for standards efforts several times and I can tell you that the process of
working through these IPR policies is slow, painful and expensive. I think
presenting an "already baked" (ie already drafted by lawyers) IPR policy to
this community and asking for a up/down vote is not in keeping with the
spirit of this development process. 

            -Gabe

 


  _____  


From: specs-bounces at openid.net [mailto:specs-bounces at openid.net] On Behalf
Of Brett McDowell
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 6:48 AM
To: Recordon, David
Cc: specs at openid.net; general at openid.net
Subject: Re: OpenID IPR Policy Draft

 

This is normally lawyer work.  I recommend the companies & individuals
invested in OpenID immediately turn this exercise over to your legal counsel
to ensure your interests--and the interests of the community--are protected
appropriately. 

Does the new OpenID organization have legal counsel retained (I don't mean
volunteers, but actually hired)?  If not, that would be my second
recommendation.

--Brett

On 12/6/06, Recordon, David <drecordon at verisign.com> wrote:

Hey guys,
Been working with Gabe, and others, on starting to draft an IPR Policy
for OpenID specifications.  We'd appreciate feedback in terms of if what
is written captures the correct intent of the community?  We realize the 
language isn't technically as tight as it needs to be, though first want
to make sure it is saying the right thing.  It is largely based on the
IPR Policy for Microformats.

http://openid.net/wiki/index.php/IPR_Policy

Thanks,
--David
_______________________________________________
specs mailing list
specs at openid.net
http://openid.net/mailman/listinfo/specs




-- 
Brett McDowell +1.413.662.2744 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-general/attachments/20061207/f3d02e3d/attachment-0002.htm>